2010/9/5 Adam Chlipala <[email protected]>: > I've started implementing this. Everything works, save that the semantics > differs between Postgres and MySQL/SQLite. Postgres won't let you continue > using a transaction after one command has failed, whereas MySQL and SQLite > allow many errors within one transaction. (Remember that every Ur/Web page > execution is implicitly inside a single transaction.) What does everyone > think about whether that semantics is acceptable for Ur/Web? The more > liberal semantics can be implemented for Postgres using savepoints, but it > would decrease performance. If no one would want to keep running SQL after > an error, then there doesn't seem to be a reason to do more work. > > Personally, I'm in favor of never using this new feature, anyway, but I'm > interested in what y'all who argued for it think. :)
I think it would be nice to have possibility to manually restart transaction so DB still can be accessed after error. _______________________________________________ Ur mailing list [email protected] http://www.impredicative.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ur
